Bad dogs or bad owners?

Bad dogs.

Dogs that are bred to maul/maim/kill- being marketed as the perfect family pet, and the gullible

who fall for the scam. Case in point the "rescue Angel" who was killed by her pets last week.

Excellent article that points out this fact titled "Savings Mans Best Friend"-

How Dangerous Breed Advocates are Redefining Our Relationships with Dogs and Why We Should Stop Them

http://blog.dogsbite.org/2012/01/saving-mans-best-...

"Rescue Angel" falls for the marketing ploy and pays with her life-

http://cravendesires.blogspot.com/2012/08/best-fri...

I support BSL and anyone that cares about people and other animals SHOULD!!!

Perfectly summarized HERE

Merritt Clifton - August 16, 2012 (Links added by DogsBite.org)

Meagan Dziura,

ANIMAL PEOPLE very strongly favors breed-specific legislation following the San Francisco model, which requires that all pit bulls be sterilized.

I'm a step beyond the ANIMAL PEOPLE editorial board position. I very strongly favor the Ontario model, which grandfathered pit bulls in the province at the time their breed-specific law was passed, but does not allow the breeding or import of pit bulls, including their lookalike mixes and close relatives.

My major disagreement with the Ontario model is that it does not cover Rottweilers, who are also about 11 times more likely to kill or disfigure humans & other animals as the average dog, but are much less over-represented in animal shelter intakes and killing.

I don't see any negative effects on communities from breed-specific legislation.

What I see are much safer, healthier communities, where people can jog, bicycle, play in front yards, and walk their dogs without fear of a pit bull leaping over a fence or out a window or through a screen door or popping up at large out of nowhere, killing or maiming their victims without, in most cases, any previous bite history and any prior warning.

What I see are communities where dogs are again welcome everywhere, as they were during my childhood and youth, before the proliferation of dangerous dogs led to bans on all dogs in many public places, even though more than 80% of the incidents resulting in the prohibitions resulted from the behavior of just one breed type, the large molossers (including pit bulls, Rottweilers, and mastiffs.)

What I see are communities where drug dealers & other criminal elements either prefer not to live, since they cannot keep dangerous dogs to guard their wares, or at least are much less dangerous to their neighbors and law enforcement.

What I see are communities where firefighters -- and I am a former firefighter -- can enter a burning building safely to do a room-to-room search, without risk of opening a door to release a dog who may be more dangerous than the fire itself.

What I see are emergency room physicians who no longer have nightmares about the degloving injuries, especially to the heads of small children, that are typical of pit bull, Rottweiler, and mastiff attacks.

What I see are lawyers screaming their heads off because they are no longer making huge sums representing the owners of dangerous dogs on the one hand and the victims of dog attacks on the other.

And of course I see animal rights activists screaming, without noticing that communities with breed-specific legislation are killing not only a fraction as many pit bulls as those without, but a fraction as many dogs. I don't see any rational reason why anyone who loves dogs would oppose legislation which, if in effect nationally, would prevent the births and premature deaths of more than 900,000 pit bulls per year.

Reality is that opposition to breed-specific legislation favors just three interest groups: dogfighters, people who want to keep dogs as weapons, and breeders of pit bulls, Rottweilers, and other large molosser dogs.

Contrary to common claim, there is no verifiable history of pit bulls in particular having ever been "nanny dogs" or popular household pets. There is, however, quite a long history of pit bull advocates lying quite demonstrably about the realities of pit bulls, dog attacks, and the pit bull record over the past couple of centuries.

And there is also quite a long history of well-meaning young people being taken in by the big lies amplified by the fronts for the pro-pit bull interest groups.

See next several e-mails & the attachment for documentation.

Merritt Clifton

Editor, ANIMAL PEOPLE

Readers may have favorite parts of Clifton's response, but his response could not be more concise in nailing not only the primary public health and safety concerns these types of dogs pose, but also the enormous shelter killing rate of pit bulls and their mixes. Despite immense efforts undertaken by humane groups to "adopt their way out" of the unwanted population of pit bulls clogging open admission shelters, pit bull euthanizations still hover above 930,000 annually.

Yes, there are bad dogs. There are more bad owners though. BSL is wrong and ineffective. Any outlawed breed will simply be replaced by other legal ones. The most dangerous part of a dog is its owner. Breed has little to do with it. Anyone that feels different about that is misinformed or a bigot.

BSL is racism. I have met a few truly bad dogs and none where of breeds targeted by BSL. Some of the worst happened to be of much more popular breeds, like border collies and Labs. BSL is supported by media hype not actual statistics.

The owners make bad dogs, ok some dogs can be bad anyway but its the owners job to control it if this situation was to arise. All dogs no matter what the breed can be trained to be obedient and safe around people, with early socialisation to Adults, children and other animals specially dogs then the animals will feel no need to be threatened by this and therefore not need to be aggressive. The dog learns from the owner and most bad dogs are the ones that are used for fighting, guarding and making people "look good or tough". The dogs will do anything to please their owner so if allowed to show agression and not get told off just praised then this is DEFINETLY the owners fault.....people like this should be ashamed for taking advantage of dogs, that want nothing more than to please their owners even if it means risking their own lives.

I believe most bad dogs can become that way because they have bad owners. That's not to say some poorly bred animals can't be bad, or rather, dangerous. I don't believe bad dogs come from specific breeds, any more than I believe, or support BSL.

Aggression is inherited so it starts with the breeding. If both parents are aggressive you can count on most of the litter having a very high predisposition for aggression. So it starts in the genetic make up of the dog. You can just count on it being aggressive. genetically speaking. lol

There are many, way too many, ignorant BYBer who know nothing about genetics & do not try to breed it out. They are just ignorant, uneducated idiots trying to make some extra money off their dogs. A very poor reason to breed dogs. Breeding is meant to better the breed & not to lessen its quality.

So yes there can be just bad dogs because of their breeding. Then to put those dogs in the hands of a bad owners? Bad plus Bad equals BAD.

Granted most people don't know very much about their pets. & I think that is very very sad. They don't know enough about the breed they own, much less any thing about canine behavior. They do every thing to human standards & pay no heed to dog behavior.

I support the BSL

Hi

I really don't believe that dogs are 'born bad'. It's the way the owners raise them that ultimately makes them who they are.

Some breeds of dogs are known for being bad and dangerous but this is just a misconception by people who really don't understand dogs and how to raise them. Some dogs do have more of a boisterous nature but I think any dog can be trained to be 'good'. I had a German Shepherd (known for being a dangerous dog) and she was the most sweetest, loving dog I've ever known.

You can raise pretty much any dog to be 'bad' if you want to, it depends on how you treat them and train them.

I also think BSL should be stopped, like I said it's the owners that are the problem not the dogs!

I absolutely oppose BSL. It is blatant racism of dogs. The most aggressive breeds I've ever had to deal with are Miniature Pinschers and Dachshunds. Why was "Cujo" a Saint Bernard? Because Saints were listed in the top five of breeds attacking humans at the time the novel was being written. So were Dobermans ("They Only Kill Their Masters"). A USPS survey of mail carriers in the 1980's found that Toy Poodles were attacking and biting more than any other breed. If we ban breeds, when do we stop?

If the background of fatal dog attacks are studied, a pattern emerges: the dog was not incorporated into the family but left outside and often tethered, and the child had no or scant contact with the dog before the attack. Require a minimal responsible ownership and the horror stories will diminish.

I think the grandfather clause is good. On certain breeds their is a definate need for laws that will protect the dog against it's owners. Simple enough, folks want to own certain breeds, yet they have no clue about the breed, their behaviors, issues. Pits for example...they need to have the laws to where these dogs have to be registered with the city. Problem is, the city does not enforce the regulations they impliment. I believe there are bad dogs. Dogs are bred solely for fighting. BUT...in my opinion, there are more bad owners than dogs. I could really get on a ten page roll on this one, but time and interest of the readers would prevent me from stating facts and opinions. We as trainers can't even agree on which method of training is the best. How are regular dog owners to know what they are doing?

The majority of these bad dogs are from bad owners. But there are some dogs that are just plain screwed, mostly from bad breeding. An old room mate of mine raised and bred dobes, all of hers had fantastic temperments. She purchased a fawn dobe to start breeding them, at 12 weeks old she started attacking. It wasn't puppy bitting. it was full on aggression, you could see it in the eyes. If you looked sideways at her she would go for you. Turned out she had rage syndrome. The breeders of her had to put down all the puppies from the litter she came from and recommended my friend do the same thing. (she got her money back too).

As for BSL ? I hate to paint all dogs with the same brush, I have groomed may PBs, rotties, etc and never had a problem. There have been the occasional dog we wouldn't touch with a barge pole but they were isolated incidents.--usually through bad uneducated owners. -and they were usually toy poodles or shiztuzs. and some small crosses.

I think there are bad dogs and bad owners and then there are owners who are rather clueless and even with good intentions mess up their dogs. In regards to BSL I do support it and not because of the dogs themselves but because of some of the people that own them.

Bad owners mostly, i do think some dogs can have a geneticaly bad temperment but in th eright hands a dog like that can be managed and wont cause a problem for others, just like a dog with a geneticaly good temperment in the wrong hands can become a big problem.